Celtic Kingdoms of the British Isles

Ancalites & Bibroci

These were two of the more obscure British Celtic tribes noted by Julius Caesar in his Commentaries. But for his two expeditions of 55 BC and 54 BC, the existence of either of them might have been completely lost to prehistory. Their locations are hard to pin down with any precision, but it may be possible that they were located close to the River Thames, and probably on the north and south banks respectively. That would have placed the early Catuvellauni to the north, the Trinovantes to the distant east, and the Atrebates to the south.

Caesar wasn't planning to document all the tribes of Britain during his expeditions. He just noted those he came into contact with, while he was subduing the south-east's dominant tribe and putting down a marker for future relations with Rome. Three of the lesser tribes were the Ancalites, Bibroci, and Segontiaci, probably minor groups who lived on the border areas between their much larger neighbours. It is only conjecture, but the Ancalites seem to have been settled around Henly-on-Thames, while just across the river and a few kilometres east were the Bibroci in Bray.

The sixteenth century author of Britannia, William Camden, wrote that Henley (in Oxfordshire) was that 'which some doe thinke the Ascalites... did inhabite'. Today, the Wiltshire tourist board claims the Ancalites as being part of that county's own ethnic ancestry. If true, this would extend the tribe's territory considerably to the west, but there is no proof for the assertion.

The Ancalites name is relatively complicated to break down. In proto-Celtic, *ang-e/o- means 'fear', and it appears that the first part of the Anglo-Saxon words 'angrisla' and 'angrislic' may have been borrowed directly from Gaulish, cognate with the Latin word 'angere', meaning 'to strangle'. This is also noted in the Angrivarii tribal name on the continent. While it is uncertain, it would seem to form the first half of the Ancalites name (anca-lites), with the 'c' pronounced as a 'k' and therefore easily shifted there from 'anga' or 'ange'. This root is also a likely candidate for the root of the names Angle and Anglyn. Does it mean fearsome? Were they describing themselves as terrors to others? Further muddying the issue is the fact that both the Angrivarii and the Angles were Ingaevones, a sort of early supertribal collective. Is the real root for this 'ing' or 'ang'?

The meaning of the Bibroci name is even more difficult to determine. A popular view seems to suggest it is related to the word for beaver, from proto-Celtic 'bebro'. Latin has the word 'bibo', which means 'to drink', a word that would also have had a Celtic root and which would provide an amusing possibility. More seriously, Bibroci is very close in pronunciation to Bibracte, a major fortress in Gaul, raising the possibility of a connection there.

(Additional information by Edward Dawson, and from External Link: River Thames.)

54 BC

Cassivellaunus kills Imanuentius, king of the Trinovantes, but the dead king's son, Mandubracius, flees to the Romans in Gaul. He wins the support of Julius Caesar and the Roman general makes the second of his exploratory forays into Britain. Cassivellaunus organises and leads a coalition army against him but is defeated by Caesar's expeditionary force south of Thamesis, near modern Brentford.

The Catuvellauni and their allies fall back to the tribal capital at Wheathampstead in Hertfordshire (a little way north of St Albans). Emissaries from five British tribes, including the Ancalites and the Bibroci, arrive at the Roman camp to treat for peace. They also reveal the location of Cassivellaunus' stronghold to Caesar, which is where the final battle is probably fought on 5 August. Cassivellaunus subsequently sues for peace and Mandubracius is reinstated as king of the Trinovantes.

Cooke in his work Thames in 1811 tried to assert that the Romans in AD 43 used a bridge at Henley to cross the river and surprise the Britons, but there is no evidence of a bridge until 1225, even though it would have been a useful connection between Ancalites and Bibroci

54 - c.30 BC

Following his defeat by Julius Caesar and the subsequent withdrawal of the Roman expeditionary force, Cassivellaunus begins to expand his tribe's territory from its core heartland north of the Thames in all directions, building up the larger kingdom that will dominate south-eastern Britain for the next century and the one which adopts the Catuvellauni name. Territory is subjugated in the modern counties of Cambridgeshire, Northamptonshire, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire east of the Cherwell, Middlesex and north-east Surrey.

Just who occupies these newly conquered territories beforehand is largely unknown, whether they are lesser tribes whose names have been lost or neighbouring tribes such as the Coritani. However, given the presumed locations of the Ancalites and the Bibroci on the banks of the Thames, this makes them ideal candidates for tribes that are subsumed within the Catuvellauni in this period. Neither are recorded again, and they are certainly not recognised as existing by the time of the Roman imperial invasion of AD 43.